THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY (RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ACQUISITION) 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC 20350-1000 FEB 1 2 2018 The Honorable William M. ?Mac? Thomberry Chairman, Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Dear Mr. Chairman: This forwards the second Annual Report to Congress for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Mission Modules Program required by Section 123 of Public Law 1 14-328, the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. The enclosed report includes: the status and plans for development, production, and sustainment; a description of each testing event; information on initial operational capability; the acquisition inventory objective; and information on the location to which systems have been or are scheduled to be delivered for the Mine Countermeasures, Surface Warfare, and Anti? Submarine Warfare Mission Packages that support the LCS. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. A copy of this letter has been sent to Chairmen McCain, Cochran and Frelinghuysen. Sincerel? James F. Geurts Enclosure: As stated Copy to: The Honorable Adam Smith Ranking Member THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY (RESEARCH. DEVELOPMENT AND 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC 20350-1000 FEB 1 2 2913 The Honorable Rodney P. relinghuysen Chairman, Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Dear Mr. Chairman: This forwards the second Annual Report to Congress for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Mission Modules Program required by Section 123 of Public Law 1 14-328, the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. The enclosed report includes: the status and plans for development, production. and sustainment; a description of each testing event; information on initial operational capability; the acquisition inventory objective; and information on the location to which systems have been or are scheduled to be delivered for the Mine Countemieasures, Surface Warfare, and Anti- Submarine Warfare Mission Packages that support the LCS. Please let me know if] can be of further assistance. A copy ofthis letter has been sent to Chairmen McCain, Thornberry, and Cochran. Sincerely, James F. Geurts Enclosure: As stated Copy to: The Honorable Nita M. Lowey Ranking Member THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY (RESEARCH. DEVELOPMENT AND ACQUISITION) 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC 20350-1000 FEB 1 2 2018 The Honorable Thad Cochran Chairman, Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Mr. Chairman: This forwards the second Annual Report to Congress for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Mission Modules Program required by Section 123 of Public Law 1 14-328, the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. The enclosed report includes: the status and plans for development, production, and sustainment; a description of each testing event; information on initial operational capability; the acquisition inventory objective; and information on the location to which systems have been or are scheduled to be delivered for the Mine Countermeasures, Surface Warfare, and Anti- Submarine Warfare Mission Packages that support the LCS. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. A copy of this letter has been sent to Chairmen McCain, Thomberry, and Frelinghuysen. Sincerely 5/6? James F. Geurts Enclosure: As stated Copy to: The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy Vice Chaimian THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY (RESEARCH. DEVELOPMENT AND 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC 20350-1000 FEB 1 2 2013 The Honorable John McCain Chairman. Committee on Armed Services United States Senate Washington, DC 20150 Dear Mr. Chairman: This forwards the second Annual Report to Congress for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Mission Modules Program required by Section 123 of Public Law 114-328, the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. The enclosed report includes: the status and plans for development, production, and sustainment; a description of each testing event; information on initial operational capability; the acquisition inventory objective; and information on the location to which systems have been or are scheduled to be delivered for the Mine Countermeasures, Surface Warfare, and Anti- Submarine Warfare Mission Packages that support the LCS. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. A copy of this letter has been sent to Chairmen Thornberry, Cochran, and Frelinghuysen. Sincerely, 9 James F. Geurts Enclosure: As stated Copy to: The Honorable Jack Reed Ranking Member Report to Congress for the Littoral Combat Ship Mission Modules Program Annual Report With President?s Budget Fiscal Year 2019 Prepared by: Assistant Secretary of the Navy Research, Development, and Acquisition 1000 Navy Pentagon Washington, DC 20350-1000 The estimated cost of this report or study for the Department of Defense is approximately $15,000 in Fiscal Year 2018. This includes $25 in expenses and $14,975 in labor. Generated on February 8. 2018 4?5617062 Report Requirement Section 123 of Public Law 114-328, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), requires the Department of Defense to submit an annual report on Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Mission Packages (MPs) as follows: (I) IN GENERAL. ?The Secretary of Defense shall include in the materials submitted 1n support of the budget of the President (as submitted to Congress under section 1105(a) of t1tle 31, United States Code) for each scal year through scal year 2022 a report on Littoral Combat Ship mission packages. (2) report under paragraph (I) shall include, with respect to each Littoral Combat Ship mission package and increment, the following: A. A description of the status of and plans for development, production, and sustainment, including?? Projected unit costs compared to originally estimated unit costs for each system that comprises the mission package; ii. Projected development costs, procurement costs, and 2 0-year sustainment costs compared to original estimates of such costs for each system that comprises the mission package; Demonstrated performance compared to required performance for each system that comprises the mission package and for the mission package as a whole; iv. Problems relating to realized and potential costs, schedule, or performance; and v. Any development plans, production plans, or sustainment and mitigation plans that may be implemented to address such problems. A description, including dates, of each developmental test, operational test, integrated test, and follow-on test event that i. Completed 1n the scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; and ii. Expected to be completed in the ?scal year covered by the report and any of the following ?ve ?scal years. The date on which initial operational capability is expected to be attained and a description of the performance level criteria that must be demonstrated to declare that such capability has been attained. A description of? i. The systems that attained initial operational capability in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; and ii. The performance level demonstrated by such systems compared to the performance level required of such systems. The acquisition inventory objective for each system. An identi?cation of? i. Each location (including the city, State, and country) to which systems were delivered in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; and ii. The quantity of systems delivered to each such location. An identi?cation of? i. Each location (including the city, State, and country) to which systems are projected to be delivered' 1n the scal year covered by the report and any of the followmg ?ve ?scal years; and ii. The quantity of systems projected to be delivered to each such location. Introduction The LCS Flight 0+ Capability Development Document (CDD) speci?es the requirements for the LCS MPs to provide focused capabilities in three areas: Surface Warfare (SUW), Mine Countermeasures (MCM), and Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW). The LCS Mission Modules (MM) Program Of?ce is responsible for oversight, development, procurement, and post-delivery ship integration of these focused-mission payloads. The Navy's 2016 Force Structure Assessment revalidated a war?ghting requirement for a minimum of 52 Small Surface Combatants (SSCs) (LCS and Frigates). As maritime threats continue to grow, the Navy is placing greater emphasis on distributed operations, highlighting the need for a full complement of SSCs. In February 2016, the Chief of Naval Operations and the Assistant Secretary for the Navy, Research, Development, and Acquisition established an LCS Review Team. The LCS Review Team, led by Commander of Naval Surface Forces, evaluated how to maximize operational availability and increase stability, simplicity, and ownership. The LCS Review Team recommended a shift in LCS crew structure, training, maintenance, and operations. In conjunction with this review, the total quantity of mission packages required for LCS was reviewed to address ship quantity changes and changes in employment approach. . The Navy has revised mission package quantities for the LCS MM Program of Record The revised quantities are based upon the total planned 32 LCS class ships and their contribution to the war?ghting capability requirements derived from the Navy?s Force Structure Assessment. The revised quantities of deployable MP5 for the LCS Mission Modules are as follows: 10 SUW MP3, 10 ASW MPs, and 24 MCM MPs, for a total of 44 deployable MP3. The 44 deployable MPs include the following: 24 W3 (8 SUW, 8 ASW, 8 MCM) to out?t the focused mission LCS ships that make up the LCS divisions of 3 deployable ships and 1 training ship 0 3 MP3 (1 SUW, 1 ASW, 1 MCM) in Mayport, FL to ensure high operational availability (A0) of the training systems for the training ships in the LCS divisions and to provide spare systems for each focused mission area 0 4 MP5 (1 SUW, 1 ASW, 2 MCM) in San Diego, CA to out?t the test ships (LCS 1-4) and provide additional spare capacity for training ships and deployers 4 MP5 (4 MCM) to out?t LCS 29-32 to mitigate war?ghting capability needs across the MCM mission area other Vessels of Opportunity (V 003) to meet the war?ghting capability requirements and account for MCM maintenance cycles An overall total of 24 MCM MPs are required to comply with Section 1046 of the FY 2018 NDAA which prohibits the retirement of legacy MCM forces until the Navy has identi?ed replacement capability and procured a quantity of such systems to meet combatant MCM operational requirements that are currently being met by legacy forces. The program will procure production representative systems for the 44 deployable mission packages. One SUW NIP was procured as a production representative Engineering Development Model (EDM) with Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy funds and is included in the inventory objective of 10 SUW MP8. The program has procured four non- deployable EDM assets (one MCM MP, two SUW MPs, and one ASW MP) which are used for integration, test and training efforts. An updated LCS MM Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) based on changes in quantities and the other LCS Review Team recommendations will be completed in 2018. The Navy routinely assesses evolving war?ghting needs to optimize capacity across mission areas which may impact MP quantities. Any changes to MP quantities will be addressed in future budget submissions. At the time of this report?s submission, an appropriation for FY 2018 has not been approved. This report assumes the LCS MM program is funded in accordance with the FY 2019 President?s Budget. Pending FY 2018 congressional reductions to both and procurements will affect the information presented in this report. Impacts of speci?c reductions are addressed in the relevant sectiOns within. SUW MP Capabilities Descriptions Required by FY 2017 NDAA An LCS with an embarked SUW MP provides a robust and ?exible combat capability to rapidly detect, track, and prosecute small-boat swarm threats missions critical to acquiring and maintaining sea control. When equipped with the SUW MP, the LCS has enhanced detection and engagement capability against Fast Inshore Attack Craft, Fast Attack Craft, and other littoral surface threats. The SUW MP provides a layered defense by use of manned and unmanned aircraft, medium range surface-to-surface missiles, and 30mm gun systems. The SUW MP includes two 30mm Gun Mission Modules (GMMs), one Surface-to-Surface Missile Module (SSMM), one Aviation Module that employs one Vertical Take-off Unmanned Air Vehicle (V TUAV) and an MH-6OR multi-mission helicopter, and one Maritime Security Module (MSM) that includes two 11m Rigid-Hulled In?atable Boats to conduct Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure missions. The SUW MP ?inctions in coordination with the ship?s organic 57mm gun, Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) short-range air defense system, and eventual Over the Horizon missile. As illustrated in Figure 1, threats are detected by the MH-6OS helicopter and/or the unmanned MQ-8 VTUAV. A small boat swarm threat can be engaged at long range by Hell?re missiles from the MH-6OR or at closer ranges by Longbow Hell?re missiles launched from the SSMM, and by coordinated employment of the LCS core 57mm gun and the 30mm GMMs. . Detect, Track. Classify 0TH Missile tea-w Can-hm Notes: Green Boxes SUW MP Capabilities Grey Boxes Core Ship Capabilities Provides a layered defense against small boat swarm threats and Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure capabilities Figure 1: SUW MP Capabilities Figure 2 provides the incremental delivery timeline of the SUW MP capabilities. IOC in NOV 2014 ICC in FY2019 intelligence, Surveillance Reconnaissance intelligence, Surveillance a Reconnaissance MW: wilt-dag EOIIR Baillie mules with mm Maritlme Intendictlon 3 E. Counter Fast Counter against Fast Inshore Attack Craft 8: Fast Attack Craft (PAC) Inshore Attack Craft I Will: - L?"rfam?mfm i Missile Module Gun Hell?re Mistl- Core Ship Capability - Notes: I Navy will use the helicopter andlor ship based 01H missile to meet the Long Range Engagement Additional Attribute. I Green Border I Achieved IOC Figure 2: SUW MP Capability Delivery (A) Current status of and plans for development, production, and sustainment: The Navy achieved Initial Operational Capability (10CNovember 2014. These modules are mature, in production, and operationally deployed in the Fleet. A ?rm ?xed priced production and sustainment contract was awarded on March 16, 2017 to Northrop Grumman Corporation that will deliver these modules and the SSMM module on budget. The SSMM with Longbow Hell?re is currently in testing and is exceeding threshold requirements. To date, the SSMM has achieved an 83 percent successful engagement rate. The addition of the SSMM will make LCS with an embarked SUW MP the most capable ship in'the Navy in countering the small boat threat. The SSMM module is embarked on LCS 5 and is ready to continue testing. The Navy obtained Weapons Safety Explosives Safety Review Board approval for SSMM missile shots. LCS 5?s Post Shakedown Availability has been extended to prepare the ship to support pro-deployment training for scheduled deployments at the end of FY 2018. The Navy expects to conduct the initial phase of developmental testing from LCS 5 in March 2018 and in July 2018, SSMM will be transitioned to LCS 7 to continue deveIOpmental testing and begin operational testing with 10C in early FY 2019. Given the ship?s availability, the program is minimizing the cost and schedule impacts of this delay. The program has applied resources to conduct initial stages of SSMM integration on the LCS Independence-variant, with a focus on combat system and software integration. This work will prepare the program to quickly shift to Independence-variant testing upon completion of reedom-variant tests. Additionally, the program has focused on transitioning the SSMM baseline to production. Maintaining FY 2018 and planned FY 2019 funds will be critical to mitigating the cost and schedule impacts. Projected unit cost compared to originally estimated unit cost for each system that comprises the The original estimated unit costs shown in Table 1 are based on the LCS MM program?s Milestone 2013 APB. Current estimates are based on contract actuals and align to the FY2019 President?s Budget request. SUW MP support containers are procured through the program?s ?Common? line. No signi?cant changes to SUW unit costs are expected. Table 1: SUW MP Mission System Unit Costs . I . I - 3 I System Original Estimate Current Estimate Gun Mission Module (x2 per SUW MP) $8.8 $8.7 Surface to Surface Mission Module $14.4 $11.5 Maritime Security Module $5.9 $2.9 11m (x2 per module) $1.4 $1.2 Support Equipment $4.5 $1.7 Note: Includes production engineering support costs. Projected development costs, procurement costs, and 20-year sustainment costs compared to original estimates of such costs for each system that comprises the Tables 13 through 15 show the projected development, procurement, and sustainment costs. (ii) Demonstrated performance compared to required performance for each system that comprises the whole; The SUW MP is required to detect and track, classify, and engage the small boat threat. During Operational testing in FY 2014 and FY 2015, the program demonstrated detect and track, classi?cation, and interim engagement requirements. With the addition of SSMM in FY 2018, the SUW MP with associated mission systems are expected to meet all CDD Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) threshold requirements for the small boat threat as depicted in Figure 3. SUW MP - Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) Threshold Objective Detect&Track lg i <9 Mir-son, 11m RHIB, 30mm Gun . Mil-colt. 11m al-lle, 30mm Gun, MQ-ee mm a SSMM Engage i <9 0 Materiel Availability i=0 Train to Certify . Detect I Track Indudes seaframe 8: helicopter contribution. Aviation detachment adds capability to meet threshold. Under certain circumstances, of VTUAV may furdrer Increase the performance. KPP demonstrated and met on both LCSvarlants Freedom Variant In 2014 and USS Independence Variant In 2015}. Classification Includes seaframe helicopter contribution. Aviation detachment adds capability to meet threshold. Under certain circumstances, addition of WUAV may further Increase the performance. KPP demonstrated and met on both LCS variants (USS Freedom Variant In 2014 and USS Independence Variant In 2015). Met SUW initial engagement requirement {as documented In the Capability Production Document (CPDH and demonstrated on both LCS variants Freedom Variant In 2014 and USS independence Variant In 2015]. The threshold Development Document requlrement Is projected to be met with SSMM with Longbow Hell?re. M?sd??ab?m De?nition: A measure of the percentage of die total Inventory ofa system operationally capable (ready for tasking) of performing an assigned mission at a given time. based on materiel condition. This can be expressed mathematically as the number of operational end itemsftotal population. The Materiel addresses the total population of end items planned for operational use, Including those temporariiy In a non-operational status once placed Into sen-lice [such as for depot-level malntenance]. Value will Increase with each MP delivered. the process of Integrating the full spectrum of training from Individuals training In systems to ?nal ISIC crew certification in an off-ship environment Figure 3: SUW MP Performance Problems relating to realized and potential costs, schedule, or performance; The SUW MP is projected to deliver within the required schedule and performance parameters as set by the Milestone APB. At the time this report was prepared, there is a pending congressional reduction against the FY 2018 SSMM procurement. If realized, initial fielding of this capability will be delayed approximately 18 months. There is also a pending congressional reduction against one set of Gun Mission Modules and one Maritime Security Module that represent the ?nal procurements for these modules. If realized, this reduction will require signi?cant non-recurring engineering costs to restart the GMM production line in FY 2020+ to meet the Navy?s requirement. Additionally, technical evaluation (TECHEVAL) and operational testing on the Independence-variant is not fully funded. The Navy will address Independence-variant testing resourced to the LCS TEMP 1695, Revision approved January 2018, in future budget submissions. (iv) Any development plans, production plans, or sastainment and mitigation plans that may be implemented to address such problems. There are no plans required. (B) A description, including dates, of each devel0pmental test, operational test, integrated test, and follow-on test event that is completed in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by this report; and (ii) expected to be completed in the ?scal year covered by the report and any of the followin ?ve fiscal years. Table 2 provides a summary of completed (prior year ?scal year) and planned (current year ?scal year and the next ?ve ?scal years) test events. Table 2: SUW MP Testing Precedin suw MP Test Type Year 3 cv FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 GMM MSM SSMM Developmental Test - STF FRE IND GMM MSM SSMM Developmental Test - DT FRE IND GMM MSM SSMM Integrated Test - TECHEVAL FRE IND GMM MSM SSMM Operational Test FRE 1ND GMM: Gun Mission Module MSM: Maritime Security Module SSMM: Surface to Surface Missile Module STF: Structural Test Fire DT: Developmental Test TECHEVAL: Technical Evaluation FRE: Freedom variant IND: Independence variant SSMM Testing: A Structural Test Fire was conducted from LCS 7 in February 2017 to validate that the ship?s structure and equipment are capable of withstanding the vibration, shock, noise, gases, and other blast byproducts from ?ring the missiles. Four of the four missile shots resulted in success?il engagements. Figure 4: Structural Test Firing from USS DETROIT (FEB 2017) To date, SSMM testing has yielded 20 successful engagements out of 24 total missile shots. Software updates have been implemented to correct root causes for the four unsuccessful engagements. The SSMM was embarked on LCS 5 in August 2017 and obtained Weapon System Explosives Safety Review Board (WSESRB) approval to conduct developmental testing and missile shots. Developmental testing will begin in the second quarter of FY 2018 on LCS 5. However due to scheduled pre-deployment training and deployments at the end of FY 2018, the Navy will complete Freedom-variant developmental and operational testing on LCS 7. The developmental testing planned is extensive, and includes numerous Design of Experiment runs. Testing will include SSMM on-load, groom and alignment, end-to-end testing, and SSMM single target and multiple target tracking events. Additionally, single target and multiple target ?ring events will be conducted. The SUW MP with SSMM will complete Operational testing from the Freedom-variant in the ?rst quarter of FY 2019 to demonstrate the SUW ability to meet threshold KPPs utilizing a combination of core ship capabilities, aviation assets, and both the GMM and SSMM modules. The program will make a production decision in late FY 2018. To support this decision, the Navy will complete the following activities that result in low risk to entering production: 1) formal testing on the Freedom-variant (including missile shots on two ships); 2) integration activities (including combat system and software integration efforts) on the Independence? variant; 3) on-load of SSMM on an Independence-variant and an end-to-end integration event that included tracking exercises in the ?rst quarter of FY 2017; 4) validation of the SSMM Technical Data Package; 5) a Physical Con?guration Audit 6) develop manufacturing procedures; and 7) conduct a Production Readiness Review. (C) The date on which is expected to be attained and a description of the performance level criteria that must be demonstrated to declare that such a capability has been attained. The SUW MP with the GMM and MSM has been demonstrated and tested. Operational testing on the Freedom-variant completed in the third quarter of FY 2014, and IOC was achieved in November 2014. Subsequent operational testing on the Independence-variant completed in the ?rst quarter of FY 2015. The SSMM capability is expected to achieve 10C in early FY 2019. In order to achieve IOC, the SUW MP with SSMM will need to meet the threshold KPPs as documented in the LCS Flight 0+ CDD (see Figure 3). The Navy will transition to production in FY 2018 to support planned Fleet deployments of the SUW MP. The Navy will conduct a Production Readiness Review 1n late FY 2018 to support FY 2018 SSMM procurements. (D) A description of the systems that attained 10C tn the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; (ii) the performance level demonstrated by such systems compared to the performance level required of such systems. No SUW MP systems achieved IOC in FY 2017. 10 (E) The acquisition inventory objective listed by system; Table 3 provides the SUW MP inventory objectives. Table 3: SUW MP Inventory Objective System Inv. Obj. SUW MP 10 Gun Mission Module (GMM) (2 per package) 20 Maritime Security Module (MSM) 10 Surface to Surface Mission Module (SSMM) 10 Note: The SUW MP inventory is based on the certi?ed deployable quantities. Two procured GM EDMs are included. (F) An identification of each location (including city, state, and country) to which systems were delivered in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; and (it) the quantity of systems delivered to each such location. The SUW MP Deliveries shown in Table 4 are aligned with the FY 2019 budget request and do not re?ect pending congressional reductions. Table 4: SUW MP Deliveries System ma?a? Prior FY18 ms Pm Fm nu ms to Complete Hotel City I Sute I Country Deliveries Gun Mime" Mam? Port Huenemel GMMs perSUW MP . ANNUALTOTAL 12 4 1 I 0 CI 21: Two RON-E procured GMMEDMS areindudedin the pnor deliveries and count towards inuentarv chrome. Mantime Security Port HuenemeModule ANNUALTUTAL 5 I 1 1 10 Surface to Surface Port Huenzme Mission Module ANNUALTOTAL 1 2 2 1 4? 10 Note: procured assets are used for development, integration. and test (including environmental qualification testing). These assets are not included in the projected deliveries to meet inventory objective unless otherwise noted. (G) An identi?cation of (I) each location (including city, state, and country) to which systems are projected to be delivered in the ?scal year covered by the report and any of the following ?ve ?scal years; and (it) the quantity of systems projected to be delivered to each such location. Table 4 identi?es the location and quantity of system deliveries. 11 ASW MP Capabilities Descriptions Required by FY 2017 NDAA An LCS with an embarked ASW MP can effectively conduct detect-to-engage operations against modern diesel-electric and nuclear submarines. The ASW MP consists of airborne and surface assets, both manned and unmanned, and multiple distributed sensors netted together to continuously exploit real-time undersea data (see Figure 5). The ASW MP utilizes a continuously active Variable Depth Sonar (VDS), Multi-Function Towed Array (MFTA), a Light Weight Tow (LWT) torpedo defense system, an MH-60R helicopter, and an MQ-8 VTUAV to provide an anti-submarine capability in the Open ocean and littorals. Localize. 8. Track Fi? F, Provides ASW Escort Capabitity Against Modern Diesel-Electric Nuclear Submarines Will Be the Most Capable ASW system in the Navy?s Surface Fleet Figure 5: ASW MP Capabilities The ASW MP capability exploits the convergence zone sound pr0pagation path to provide the Navy with both an in?stride and rapid ASW escort and large area search capability. The continuous active sonar processing enables the VDS to be employed as a tactically effective barrier and in small area searches in non-convergence zones and shallow water environments. Once the threat is initially identi?ed, the will be deployed to relocate the threat using its onboard dipping sonar, sonobuoys, or radar, and the will engage adversary submarines using MK 54 torpedoes. 12 Figure 6 provides the ASW MP delivery timeline. FY 2019 ASW Escort I Large Area Clearance ASW Escort I M?sgign - - . Module Multi-Function Continuous Active Towed Array Variable Depth Sonar Torpedo Defense 8. Countermeasures To edo De se& Countermeasures Light Weight Tow Localization Engage 7; NIH-60R VTUAV Figure 6: ASW Capability Delivery 3 (A) A description of the status of and plans for development, production, and sustainment: The Navy conducted risk reduction activities in FY 2016 that focused on reducing the weight and ship integration risk for the Escort Mission Module (EMM). After successfully reducing the expected weight to within requirements and signi?cantly reducing the primary ship integration risks, the Navy awarded an option to build the ASW EMM to Raytheon Corporation in FY 2017. Raytheon is developing the initial EMM Pre-Production Test Article (PPTA) that will undergo end-to-end integration testing to characterize acoustic performance and two phases of dockside testing in the third and fourth quarters of FY 2018. Raytheon is on track to deliver the initial EMM PPTA in the ?rst quarter of FY 2019. Following delivery of the PPTA to the Navy, white ship (non-LCS shipboard) testing at the Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center will occur in the second quarter FY 2019 to characterize hydrodynamic performance. LCS ship modi?cation planning and design efforts are proceeding as planned in FY 2018, leading to modi?cations to LCS 3 that will allow embarkation of the ASW MP in early FY 2019 to support formal developmental and operational testing. Operational testing will complete in the fourth quarter of FY 2019, followed by IOC. The program will conduct a formal Production Readiness Review and make a production decision in the third quarter of FY 2019. The Production Readiness Review will be informed by risk reduction efforts and formal testing (including DOE runs) completed on the Freedom- variant. In addition, the ASW MP ship alteration Technical Data Package will be validated, a Physical Con?guration Audit will be completed, manufacturing procedures will be developed, manufacturing material and tooling will be procured, and the production line will be stood up tosupport planned FY 2019 procurements. l3 The ASW MP will take advantage of improvements developed under the Navy?s Advanced Processing Build, Advanced Surveillance Build, and Advanced Capability Build sonar processing programs for submarines, cruisers, destroyers, and surveillance ASW communities. All sonar processing programs are managed under a common development process titled The ASW MP leverages these existing Navy programs to incorporate LCS unique improvements that focus on functional domains essential to mission package success. A premium is placed on developing common capabilities and modular architecture technologies to maximize commonality with the ?eet and reduce life cycle cost. The ASW MP also includes a Torpedo Defense Module built around the LWT torpedo countermeasure. EDMs have been built and performance tested. White ship testing of the LWT system is planned for mid-FY 2018 to characterize system performance. The program plans to integrate with LCS and test with the ASW MP in FY 2019. The torpedo defense capability will be installed on all LCS hulls to provide a torpedo defense capability regardless of the MP embarked. At the time this report was prepared, there are pending FY 2018 congressional reductions (HAC-D) (SAC-D) a 40 percent reduction) to ASW MP development that will signi?cantly impact ASW schedule and cause associated cost growth. If the reduction is realized, IOC of the ASW MP will be delayed two years from FY 2019 to FY 2021. A delay in IOC jeopardizes planned FY 2019 and FY 2020 procurements resulting in a production line break due to expiration of contract options in the Escort Mission Module contract with Raytheon. Cost growth would likely be incurred as the Government would be in a sole source environment. In addition, the loss of procurements would result in LCS 21 through LCS 24 deploying without planned ASW capabilities. Projected unit cost compared to originally estimated unit cost for each system that comprises the As shown in Table 5, original estimated unit costs are based on the program?s Milestone 2013 APB. Current estimates for ASW MP systems are based on EDM costs and align to the PB 2019 budget request. No signi?cant changes to ASW unit costs are expected. Table 5: ASW MP Unit Costs a System Original Estimate Current Estimate Escort Mission Module Continous Active Sonar/Variable Depth Sonar $13.0 $13.2 Multi?Function Towed Array (MFTA) $5.5 $5.1 Torpedo Defense Module Light Weight Tow (LWT) Torpedo Countermeasure $0.8 $1.5 14 (ii) Projected development costs, procurement costs, and 20-year sustainment costs compared to original estimates of such costs for each system that comprises the Tables 13 through 15 Show the projected development, procurement, and sustainment costs. Demonstrated performance compared to required performance for each system that comprises the mission package and for the MP as a whole; Figure 7 depicts the ASW MP performance expectations. ASW MP - Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) Threshold Objective 1 Search Rate 1 . I Redetect, Localize and Engagg I I Baseline Capability Materiel Availability I 0 Train to Certify 3 NM: 1. Primary system?Cutaneous Active Sonarfiloriabie Depth Sonar: Secondary systems? Airborne Low Prequel-icy Sonar I Sonobuoys 2. Primry Secondary systems ?Collaborcdve Maritime Patrol In Reconnaissance Aircraft or Corriersu'ike Group Hit-50R Detect and Classify re?ects primary sensor contribution only. For the ASW MP, this represents LCS Variable Depth Sonar supporting ASW Bcort, ASW Barrier and Area Search mission roles. Search Rate is de?ned as the Average Aggregate Search Rate In Shallow and Deep Major Combat Operation (NICO) 2 environments. ASW MP ability to redetect. localize and engage In a tactically effective timeframe ls essential to supporting the 'Cue to Kill? construct. For the ASW MP. this represents the operating as an ASW Pouncer In response to LCS VDS or ownship-genelated ASW data or Area of Uncertainty Time to Engage is de?ned as time to release an ASW weapon from the tine the MH-SOR deploys Its localization sensorisi. De?nition: A measure of the percentage of the total inventory of a system operationally capable [ready for tasking] of performing an assigned mission at a given time, based on materiel condition. This can be expressed mathematically as the number of operational end Items/total population. The Materiel Availability addresses the total population ofend items planned for operational use, including those temporarily in a non-operational status once placed Into service {such as for depot-level maintenance}. Value will increase with each MP delivered. TZC is the process of Integrating the full spectrum of training from individuals training In systems to final ISIC crew certi?cation in an off-ship environment Figure 7: ASW MP Performance (iv) Problems relating to realized and potential costs, schedule, or performance; Operational testing of the ASW MP on the Freedom-variant was delayed from FY 2018 to the fourth quarter of FY 2019 to allow the program to conduct additional weight reduction and ship integration risk mitigation activities prior to award of the ASW EMM EDM. These risk mitigation activities were successful and resulted in a March 2017 award of the EMM contract to Raytheon. Due to pending FY 2018 congressional budget reductions, the program is assessing impacts to the ASW MP scheduled activities, including the start of the Independence-variant deve10pment and LWT DOE. If these marks are realized these 15 activities are at risk of being deferred. The ASW MP is projected to deliver Within the required cost and performance parameters. Any development plans, production plans, or sustainment and mitigation plans that may be implemented to address such problems. The Navy expects to transition to production in FY 2019 to support planned Fleet deployments of the ASW MP. In mid-FY 2019 the Navy plans to conduct a PRR to support FY 2019 procurements. (B) A description, including dates, of each developmental test, operational test, integrated test, and follow-on test event (1) completed in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; and (ii) expected to be completed in the ?scal year covered by the report and any of the following ?ve fiscal years. Table 6 provides a summary of completed (prior year fiscal year) and planned (current year ?scal year and the next ?ve ?scal years) test events. Table 6: ASW MP Testing Preceding System Test Type Year CY FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 DevelopmentalTest- DT FRE IND ASW MP Integrated Test - TECHEVAL FRE IND OperationalTest FRE IND DT: Developmental Test TECHEVAL: Technical Evaluation FRE: Freedom variant IND: Independence variant (C) The date on which 10C is expected to be attained and a description of the performance level criteria that must be demonstrated to declare that such a capability has been attainedplanned for the fourth quarter of FY 2019. To achieve IOC, the ASW MP KPPs as documented in the LCS Flight 0+ CDD must be demonstrated. (D) A description of the systems that attained 10C in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; (it) the performance level demonstrated by such systems compared to the performance level required of such systems. The MFTA used by the ASW MP is a ?elded system. None of the remaining ASW systems attained 10C in FY 2017. 16 (E) The acquisition inventory objective listed by system; Table 7 provides the ASW MP inventory objective. Table 7: ASW MP Inventory Objective Inv. System Obj. ASW MP 10 Escort Mission Module Multi-Function Towed Array (MFTA) 10 Continuous Active Sonar Depth Sonar (VDS) 10 Torpedo Defense Module Light-Weight Tow (LWT) Torpedo Countermeasure 10 Note: The ASW MP inventory is based on certi?ed deployable quantities. LWT inventory objective based on procuring LWT shipset (2 tails shipset) for each ofthc IO ASW MPs. F) An identi?cation of each location (including city, state, and country) to which systems were delivered in the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year covered by the report; and (ii) the quantity of systems delivered to each such location. N0 systems were delivered in the last ?scal year. (G) An identification of each location (including city, state, and country) to which systems are projected to be delivered in the fiscal year covered by the report and any of the following ?ve ?scal years; and (ii) the quantity of systems projected to be delivered to each such location. Table 8 identi?es the location and quantity of future year system deliveries. Table 8: ASW MP Projected Deliveries I Planned Locations I Total System I my State I Couml Prior nus I 5119' n3 09mm? Notes Escort Mission Module Port Hueneme ANNUALTOTAL 2 2 2 4 10 MFTA PortHueneme ANNUALTOTAL Torpedo Defense Module The ro ramwill set 2 PortHueneme IOASWME: ANNUALTOTAL Note: procured assets are used for development, integration, and test (including environmental quali?cation testing). These assets are not included in the projected deliveries to meet inventory objective unless otherwise noted. MCM MP Capabilities Descriptions Required by FY 2017 NDAA The MCM MP provides the capability to detect, classify, identify, and neutralize mines throughout the water column, from the surface to the sea ?oor. The MCM MP provides these capabilities through the use of sensors and weapons deployed from unmanned vehicles and the MH-6OS multi-mission helicopter (see Figure 8), keeping the ship and its crew out of the minefield. 17 Mine Threat Detect/Classify Identify Neutralize Beach/Surf Zone Accomplished by Other Forms Accomplished byOther Forces 1. .J {Not 15 Requlrement) {Not 113 Requirement) comm- Expedl?onary MCM Expeditionary MCM Near Surface Near Surface Mine Detection {Unmannucudaj {Unul?arrumdaj <21? ant-d ?12: nuc- - Volume "Wm" . Volume 8: Bottom Min-hunting ugh-?W I 9? gg Volume 8: Bottom Mlnehumlng ?3 WWLM mined In?uence MOP Follow on systemsa add ca abil' to the Water Column' the Detect-to-Engage Sequence Figure 8: MCM MP Capabilities For minehunting operations, the MCM MP utilizes a system of systems approach. Each system within the MP targets speci?c portions of the water column and particular segments of the detect?to-engage sequence (see Figure 8). Proceeding through the water column and detect-to- engage sequence, the Airborne Laser Mine Detection System (ALMDS) detects near- surface (top 30ft of the water column) mine threats. Mines located ?in the volume? deeper in the water column) or on the bottom are detected by the sonar towed by the MCM Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV). Once mines have been detected and classi?ed, mines in the volume are identi?ed by the Airborne Mine Neutralization System (AMNS) and bottom mines are identi?ed by the After mines have been identi?ed, they are neutralized by AMNS for volume and bottom mines or Barracuda for near surface mines. For buried mines or in highly cluttered bottom environments, the Knife?sh Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (UUV) uses low frequency broadband sonar technology to detect, classify, and identify mine threats. It is capable of detecting and classifying buried mines and has improved performance versus stealthy mines compared to acoustic imagery sonars. When mine hunting operations require supplemental clearance capability or are impractical, the Unmanned In?uence Sweep System (UISS) is used to sweep acoustic and magnetic mine threats throughout the water column. The MCM MP also provides mine hunting capability in support of amphibious assault operations. The VTUAV with the Coastal Battle?eld Reconnaissance and Analysis 18 (COBRA) payload can detect mine?elds and obstacles on the beach and in the surf zone. COBRA is being delivered in two increments. COBRA Block 1 addresses the beach zone, and COBRA Block 2 addresses the surf zone. Figure 9 provides the incremental MCM MP delivery timeline. Figure 9: MCM Capability Delivery FY 2017 I FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 Beyond FYDP . Near Surface Mine Detection SUSHIHECI Buried 3! Clutter Volume 8: Bottom Near Surface ll 5 Du: Hm] I I: In?uence Sweep Minehunting Minehunting Neutralization 5-2" uni-d mm was ?nan-L Medial: 72"? Volume 81 Bottom . Mine Neutralization nos-zoo. Surf Zone Mine urss MCM usv Detection Sweep Payload i Bead: Zone Mlne Detection -. 7K . Ibctl Mam Mum?muahmw momma-tumu- Note: Green Border Achieved Incrementally Delivering Capability and Removing the Sailor from the Minefield (A) Current status of and plans for development, production, and sustainment: The MCM MP leverages systems already under development by the Navy to deliver an MCM capability and revolutionizes mine warfare by removing the ship and sailor from the mine?eld. The system of systems approach to MCM was successfully demonstrated during MCM TECHEVAL in 2015. As the program delivers incremental capability to the ?eet, it will leverage comprehensive system-level testing performed by the systems? programs of record and LCS integrated testing to inform production decisions to build MCM capacity and deliver capability to the ?eet. For instance, several of the MCM MP systems performed well during MCM MP TECHEVAL and met their requirements. The Navy declared IOC for the ALMDS and the AMNS in November 2016. These systems are mature and have entered production. ALMDS provides the capability to search and detect mines in the near-surface region of the water column, and AMNS provides the capability to identify and neutralize volume and bottom mines. These systems, coupled with their associated support equipment and support container, make up the Near Surface Detection (N SD) Module and Airborne Mine 19 Neutralization (AMN) Modules respectively. The Navy has certi?ed the MCM MP with NSD and AMN capabilities as ready for deployment on Independence-variant ships. The MQ-8 VTUAV helicopter-borne COBRA system is the primary system of the Coastal Mine Reconnaissance (CMR) module and provides a beach zone mine detection capability. COBRA completed system-level operational testing and achieved IOC in July 2017. A CMR developmental test will be conducted in the third quarter of FY 2018 to verify and validate the MCM MP speci?cation requirements and communication links, as well as assess crew pro?ciency to perform the beach zone mission from planning through post mission analysis. Following testing, the CMR module will achieve IOC in the fourth quarter of FY 2018. The Unmanned Sweep Module featuring the UISS is in ?nal stages of development and test. This module provides an acoustic and magnetic in?uence mine sweeping capability. The developmental testing phase will re?ne and validate launch and recovery, shipboard communications and USV command and control, shipboard handling and operational procedures, and shipboard software operation and interfaces. The Navy will perform developmental testing and an operational assessment from shore using the Mission Package Portable Control Station (LCS in a box) in FY 2018 in support of Milestone C. Initial integration and testing from an Independence-variant will also be conducted in FY 2018. System-level operational testing followed by an integrated test from an Independence- variant LCS is planned for FY 2019. UISS plans to achieve IOC at the end of FY 2019 The Buried Minehunting Module, utilizing the Knife?sh UUV, is also in the development phase. This module will provide the MCM MP an additional volume mine hunting Capability while providing a unique, much needed capability to hunt buried mines and bottom mines in high clutter environments. In 2017, the Knife?sh UUV completed several stages of contractor testing. System developmental testing and an operational assessment from a vessel of opportunity will occur in FY 2018 in support of its Milestone C. Enactment of the 2017 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 115-31) included a reduction to LCS MM resulting in a one year delay in Knife?sh mission package integration. System-level operational testing on an Independence-variant is planned for FY 2019. Poor reliability of the Remote Multi-Mission Vehicle led to cancelation of the Remote Minehunting System (RMS) program in FY 2016. The Navy designated the MCM USV (formerly known as the Common USV) as the new platform to tow the AQS-20 sonar for rapid minehunting operations. The MCM USV will be a modi?ed UISS craft that will support both sweep and minehunting operations, depending on the embarked payload. Because the MCM USV is based on the UISS craft, additional MCM MP integration will be low risk. Communications and launch and recovery integration will be completed as part of the program of record efforts to integrate UISS. The Remote Minehunting Module with the MCM USV will provide a rapid volume and bottom minehunting capability. The Navy has aligned testing of remote minehunting capability with the rest 2020. Following testing, the MCM MP will achieve IOC by FY 2021. The program will provide a near surface neutralization capability in FY 2024 with the addition of the Barracuda Mine Neutralization System. The system is pre-Milestone and is expected to enter the Engineering, Manufacturing and Development phase in FY 2018. The 20 program will participate in the design phase of the Barracuda System. However, signi?cant LCS MM integration efforts are not expected to begin until FY 2021.10C for this capability is now planned for FY 2024 based on the Navy?s funding pro?le and RFP release on September 21, 2017. Similarly, COBRA Block H, which is planned to provide a surf-zone detection capability, is also pre-Milestone and anticipated to achieve IOC in FY 2027. This IOC date has been updated to re?ect the technical maturity of the associated technologies. The pending congressional reduction of (HAC-D) will result 1n a delay of one year for the MCM USV integration. Shipboard integration tests on Freedom and Independence- variants would be deferred, delaying planned FY 2019 MCM integration testing into FY 2020. As a result, planned MCM MP IOC would be deferred from FY 2021 to FY 2022 delaying delivery of MCM MPs with minehunting USVs to the Fleet by one year. Projected unit cost compared to originally estimated unit cost for each system that comprises the As shown 1n Table 9, the original estimated unit costs are based on the LCS MM program?s Milestone 2013 APB. Current estimates for MCM MP systems are based on contract actuals and align to the President?s FY 2019 budget'request. Unit costs for MCM USV, and Knife?sh have increased since the FY2018 budget submission. The increase in MCM USV unit cost is due to the inclusion of the Minehunting Deploy and Retrieve Rig. This was an unknown cost at the time of the PB18 submission and is required for deploying and retrieving the minehunting sonar. The increase in the unit cost re?ects production actuals. The Knife?sh unit cost has been aligned to the program of record and now includes all Buried Minehunting Module required equipment, such as the Knife?sh Lithium Ion Battery Charging Support Container. All other MCM MP support containers are procured through the program?s ?Common? line. 21 Table 9: MCM MP System Unit Costs System System Average Unit Cost Estimates for MCM MP Mission Systems (BY 2019 SM) Original Estimate Current Estimate Remote Minehunting Module MCM USV See Note 1 $17.5 AQS-ZO $7.0 $8.0 Production Engineering $1.6 $1.6 Near Surface Detection Module ALMDS $11.6 $14.1 Production Engineering $0.6 $0.6 Airborne Mine Neutralization Module AMNS $2.8 $5.1 Production Engineering $0.6 $0.6 Coastal Mine Reconnaissance COBRA $12.6 $8.6 Production Engineering $0.4 $0.4 Unmanned Mine Sweeping Module UISS $10.8 $12.1 Production Engineering $0.6 $0.6 Buried Mine Hunting Module Knifefish $9.6 $17.2 Production Engineering $0.6 $0.6 Notes: 1) Original Estimate based on procurement of RMMV. RMMV being replaced by MCM USV. 2) Original Estimate based on 3 AQS-20 per MCM MP, Current Estimate based on 2 3) Original Estimate based on 1 AMNS per MCM MP, Current Estimate based on 2 AMNS. 4) Production Engineering cost represents annual cost vice system average unit cost. (it) Projected development costs, procurement costs, and 20-year sustainment costs compared to original estimates of such costsfor each system that comprises the Tables 13 through 15 show the projected development, procurement, and sustainment Demonstrated performance compared to required performance for each system that comprises the mission package and for the MP as a whole; The MCM MP met initial performance requirements during MCM TECHEVAL as documented in the Joint Requirements Oversight Council Memorandum (J ROCM) 182-13 on December 1 1, 2013. Figure 10 shows MCM MP with associated mission systems demonstrated and expected performance. Because of the system of systems approach of the MCM MP, performance is best assessed at the MP level re?ecting the detect to engage sequence. Based on modeling and simulation, the MCM MP is not expected to meet performance objectives for the Deep Volume Focused Minehunting Area Coverage Rate Sustained ACRS) KPP in the LCS Flight 0+ CDD. Addressing the ACRS KPP is planned when Navy routes a MCM MP Capabilities Production Document (CPD). This CPD is intended to clearly outline the MCM MP requirements informed by individual system-level empirical data to include MCM USV with 20C. MCM MP Technical Performance IPCL CDD Th Id Deep Volume Focused ?5 0 Threshold Objective Minehunting NearSu-Iaoebetecuonli IPCI. Vollnelnouom?in?eutnlhetton Threshold Bottom Focused mun-immunoassa- 990 9 In?uence Mine Sweeping I miss: mire" Materiel Availability "while-mm {Bur-aids} 1:0 Train to Certify I ?ate: COBRA is required to meet the Beach and Surf Zone Attribute. COBRA I provides detection In the beach mm and COBRA Bit ll provides rnlne detection In the surf who. Themdosnotproiect meeting LES Thruhoidfor DeepVolume Focused This KPFwasa projectim based on pooenttal win tested and delivered In FY 2021 per the RMS IRT lmpiemen?mion Plan. Near surface neutralization apabiiltv Iwill be added In ?mum the Bernard: swam. rm-ettheln?uence Mine Sweeping diedeIIvery ofthe Unmanned In?uence SweeoSvstorn (LIBS). De?nition: Amd?md?nmilmtowdamnmliyapable This on be expressed mad-terna?ca?yas the nu'nberofoperational end Metal population. TheMaterieI Availability addrmuthe total nonunion ofend items plannedfrx operational use. Including time mm In a non-operational status one placed Into service (arch as for depot-level maintenance}. Value wIlI Increase with each MP delivered. 11C Is the recess of integrating the full spectrum of training from Individuals training in systems to ?nal ISIC crew certi?cation In an oft-ship elwlrorunent. Figure 10: MCM MP Performance (iv) Problems relating to realized and potential costs, schedule, or performance; and The program realized cost growth associated with development and integration of RMMV. Cancelation of the RMS program resulted in a shift to the MCM MP 10C date. The program expects a minimal increase in development costs to integrate the MCM USV as the primary mine hunting platform and expects the impact to procurement costs to be neutral. Any development plans, production plans, or sastat'nment and mitigation plans that may be implemented to address such problems. The Navy?s program of record will deliver the MCM MP following Initial Operational Test Evaluation in FY 2020 utilizing the MCM USV as the tow platform for the minehunting sonar. 23 (B) A description, including dates, of each developmental test, operational test, integrated test, and follow-on test event that is (1) completed in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by this report; and (it) expected to be completed in the ?scal year covered by the report and any of the following ?ve fiscal years. Table 10 provides a summary of completed (prior. year ?scal year) and planned (current year ?scal year and the next ?ve ?scal years) test events. Table 10: MCM MP Testing Precedin System Test Type Year 3 CY FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 Coastal Mine Reconnaissance Module IND (COBRA VTUAV) ys em eve pera Iona es LCS based Integrated Test IT Unmanned Mine Sweeping (UMSJ Module LCS based Developmenta est System level Operatlonal Test LCS based Integrated Test IND Buried Minehunting (BMH) Module LCS based Developmental Test IND {Knifefish} System level Operational Assessment IND LCS based Integrated Test IND Remote Minehunting (RMH) Module IliaseldODevelopmelt?al Test :23 vs em eve peratlona sessmen ND LCS based Integrated Test IND MCM MP Developmental Test IND IND FRE FRE Operational Test IND FRE FRE: Freedom variant IND: Independence variant X: system level tests from shore or Vessel of Opportunity The LCS MM program will leverage formal program of record testing for the individual MCM systems to inform production decisions for each system. The program will focus on completing integration of the MCM systems and completing on the Independence-variant, and then integration and on the Freedom-variant in FY 2021/2022. A. Coastal Mine Reconnaissance (CMR) Module' In 2016, the program conducted initial integration testing of the CMR, featuring the COBRA system employed from the MQ-8 VTUAV and used for the beach zone detection of mines. The initial integration focused on integrating the COBRA post mission analysis workstation into the Mission Package Computing Environment (MPCE) racks and integrating COBRA related software into MCM MP Application Software. The program conducted pier-side ?t checks of the CMR module equipment, and completed shore-based integration testing of both the CMR hardware and software at the MP Integration Laboratory at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Panama City Division. In 2017, the COBRA program conducted shore-based operational testing from the MQ-S VTUAV to validate system performance meets system requirements. COBRA achieved 10C in July 2017. In FY 2018, the program is conducting LCS developmental testing and integrated testing from the Independence-variant to validate interfaces, procedures, and training to demonstrate an end-to-end beach zone reconnaissance mission. 24 B. Unmanned Mine Sweeping Module The Unmanned Sweep Module featuring the UISS is in ?nal stages of development and test. The developmental testing phase will re?ne and validate launch and recovery, shipboard communications and USV command and control, shipboard handling and operational procedures, and shipboard software operation and interfaces. The Navy will perform developmental testing and'an operational assessment from shore using the in FY 2018 in support of Milestone C. Initial integration and testing from an A Independence-variant will be conducted in FY2018. System-level operational testing followed by an integrated test from an Independence-variant LCS is planned for FY 2019. UISS will achieve IOC at the end of FY 2019. C. Buried Minehunting Module In 2016, the program designed and began fabrication of the Knife?sh support container used to store and recharge the Knife?sh lithium ion batteries while onboard the ship. System level testing of the container was initially performed in FY 2017. The Buried Minehunting Module, utilizing the Knife?sh UUV, is ?nishing up the ?nal stages of the development phase. This module will provide the MCM MP with an additional volume mine hunting capability while providing a unique, much needed capability to hunt buried mines and bottom mines in high clutter environments. In 2017, the Knife?sh UUV completed several stages of contractor testing. System developmental testing and an operational assessment from a vessel of opportunity will occur in FY 2018 in support of Milestone C. The FY 2017 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 115-31) included a reduction to LCS MM resulting in a one year delay in Knife?sh mission package integration. System-level operational testing on an Independence-variant is planned for FY 2019. D. Remote Minehunting Module In FY 2016, the RMMV program was cancelled and the Navy shifted to the MCM USV as the tow platform for the Remote Minehunting Module. Construction of the ?rst two MCM USV craft began in the second quarter of FY 2017. These two craft will complete in June 2018 and September 2018, respectively, to support integration of the minehunting payload, the AQS-20 sonar, as well as the expeditionary AQS-24 sonar. Integration and initial testing of the sonar payload will occur in FY 2018 and the ?rst part of FY 2019. A User Operational Evaluation System (U OES) test period will occur from shore using a and from an Independence-variant in FY 2019 followed by Developmental Testing and an Operational Assessment later in FY 2019. The system will then support full MP testing starting in FY 2020. (C) The date on which IOC is expected to be attained and a description of the performance level criteria that must be demonstrated to declare that such a capability has been attained. The planned IOC date for the MCM MP is FY 2021 following maturation of the MCM USV mine hunting platform and operational testing of the MCM MP in FY 2020. The 25 performance level required to achieve IOC will be codi?ed in an MCM MP Capabilities Production Document (CPD). (D) A description of the systems that attained IOC in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; (it) the performance level demonstrated by such systems compared to the performance level required of such systems. COBRA completed system?level operational testing and achieved IOC in July 2017. Based on the completed Operational testing, the COBRA system is on track to meet requirements as documented in the COBRA CPD. (E) The acquisition inventory objective listed by system; Table 1 provides the MCM MP inventory objectives. Table 11: MCM NIP Inventory Objective System Inventory Obj. MCM MP 24 Remote Minehunting Module 48 MCM USV 24 Near Surface Detection Module Airborne Laser Mine Detection System 24 (ALMDS) Airborne Mine Neutralization Module Airborne Mine Neutralization System (AMNS) 48 Coastal Mine Reconnaissance Module COBRA 24 Unmanned Mine Sweeping Module Unmanned Influence Sweep System (UISS) 24 Buried Minehunting Module Knifefish 24 F) An identi?cation of each location (including city, state, and country) to which systems were delivered in the ?scal year preceding the ?scal year covered by the report; and (ii) the quantity of systems delivered to each such location. Table 12 identi?es the location and quantity of prior, current, and future year system deliveries. 26 Table 12: MCM MP Projected Deliveries I Planned Delivery locations I Annual Deliveries I System I City I State I CountryI rlor FY13 FY19I FYZDI FY21 FY22 I FY23 IToComplete Total Deliveries Remote Module Port HuenemeI MCMUnmanned Surface VehicleIUSV] Port HuenemeI Near Surface Detection Module Airborne LaserMine Detection IPort HuenemeI Airborne Mine Neutralization Module Airborne Mine Neutralization I Panama City Unmanned Mine Sweeping Module Sweep I Port HuenemeI Buried Minehunting Module Knifefish IPort HuenemeI Coastal Mine Reconnaisalnoe Module COBRA IPor't HuenemeI Note: procured assets are used for development, integration, and test (including environmental qualification testing). These assets are not included in the projected deliveries to meet inventory objective unless otherwise noted. (G) An identi?cation of each location (including city, state, and country) to which systems are projected to be delivered in the ?scal year covered by the report and any of the following five ?scal years; and (it) the quantity of systems projected to be delivered to each such location. See Table 12. Common Equipment Capabilities Descriptions Required by FY 2017 NDAA Projected development costs, procurement costs, and 20-year sastainment costs compared to original estimates of such costs for each system that comprises the The current estimates shown in Tables 13 and 14 re?ect development and procurement based on the revised deployable mission package quantities of 24 MCM MP3, 10 SUW MPs, and 10 ASW sustainment costs are based on the 2013 Milestone Service Cost Position. The program is conducting a revised estimate in support of an updated APB which accounts for the new quantities, changes to the sustainment/employment requirements as described in the LCS review (blue/gold crewing, mission area focused divisions, semi-permanent MP installations), and other programmatic changes (such as the switch from RMMV to the MCM USV within the MCM MP). Historic common development costs includes hardware and software development for designing the MPCE, common software support functions, the Multi-Vehicle Communications System (MVCS), data mission payload, training systems, and associated technical data and logistics products. In addition, costs associated with design and development of support containers for each mission package are included. Lastly, mission package related systems engineering, program management, mission package integration, and testing for the life of the program was included in the common development line. Common equipment includes systems and products used by multiple mission packages support containers, MPCE, MVCS, training equipment, etc.). In the FY 2019 budget request, 27 MPCE includes the adjunct hardware for the ASW sonar signal processing. In FY 2019 the program plans to procure four sets of this equipment to support LCS 22 through LCS 25 (the ?rst four ASW squadron ships). This equipment is bought through the Common Procurement line. MP sustainment costs align to the service life of the LCS. The LCS MM sustaimnent costs are comprehensive and include numerous costs shared across MPs. Therefore, sustainment costs are reported at the program level. Program sustainment costs are also being updated to align to changes in LCS and MP employment as recommended by the LCS Review Team and will be updated with the revised APB. In prior reports, the costs associated with design and development ofsupport containers, as well as mission package related systems engineering, program management, integration, and testing for the life of the program was included in common development line. The FY 2019 budget request divided the existing 3129 LCS Mission Package development budget into four sub- elements: 2550 MCM MP Development, 2551 ASW MP Development, 2552 SUW MP Development, and 3129 LCS MP Development. To align with the revised structure, this report re-distributes MP related common efforts in the revised project budget structure. Additionally, the FY 2018 report to Congress included to complete development costs to meet the SUW MP extended range additional attribute. This capability will be provided organic to the LCS and is not included in the SUW MP development costs shown below. Table 13: LCS MM Development Costs 0 inal Estimate Current Estimate- SUW MP $805.4 $718.4 ASW MP $479.6 $547.8 MCM MP $394.9 $569.9 COMMON $1,167.5 $817.6 Total $2,847.3 $2,653.7 Note: Original Estimate represents APB Threshold Values Program procurement costs have decreased since PB18 based on the updated certi?ed deployable MP quantities. The MCM MP procurement costs have increased since P818 based on unit cost increases for MCM USV, AQS-20, and Knife?sh. 28 Table 14: LCS MM Procurement Costs Program Procurement Costs (BY 2019 SM) Original Estimate Current Estimate suw MP $873.2 $318.6 ASW MP $400.0 $267.5 MCM MP 52,8650 52,4840 COMMON $1,111.1 $576.1 Total 55,2493 $3,646.2 Note: Original Estimate represents APB Threshold Values Table 15: LCS MM Sustainment Costs Program Sustainment Costs (BY 2019 SM) Original Estimate Current Estimate LCS MM Program 526.7613 TBD Note: Original Estimate represents APB Threshold Values Note: Program Sustainment Costs will be updated to reflect changes recommended by the LCS Review and to re?ect adjusted MP quantities. The updated Sustainment estimate will be incorporated in the revised APB and reported with PB 2020. Conclusion The LCS MP program is shifting from the technology development phase to a period of test and evaluation with a focus on the transition to production. This transition is highlighted by the SUW and ASW MPs achieving IOC by the end of Y201 9 and transitioning to production. Additionally, the MCM MP continues to deliver modules as they mature and is resourced to build the capacity allowing the Navy to retire legacy MCM forces. The program has been aligned to the Navy?s updated employment plans for the LCS through fused crews, semi- permanent installations of the MP8 and dedicated mission focused divisions. The program is also exploring ways to exploit the inherent bene?ts of the LCS modular mission capability to allow for the rapid transition of technologies from the lab to the Fleet. 29